<span>Aquinas presents the "unknown" argument. When he states that "...he sees no particular reason, in reason, why this should not be a world without end" (The permanent philosophy 9), he indicates that human reasoning does not logically negate the idea of a world existing eternally. This represents a "begging the question" fallacy. Thus, he reconciles faith by suggesting logic cannot disprove it. However, he's also not asserting any proof either.</span>
I believe the answer might be c, but I can't say for certain since it's been a long time since I read the book.
Could you provide more context for the sentence or is that all there is?
- They have read and reviewed the relevant literature. - They brought their books to refer to during the discussion. - They provide opinions related to the subject and back them up with text evidence. A speaker does not have to agree with others’ views or wait for their turn to prepare, but they must complete the tasks listed above.